Meg Hillier: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary undertook that Ministers, would report to Parliament once the police investigation, following liaison with the Dutch authorities over data from a disk containing Dutch DNA crime scene profiles were complete. I am today able to fulfil that commitment.
	As previously reported, this followed an initiative to exchange data between the UK and the Netherlands. The Dutch authorities shared a disk containing 2,159 DNA profiles from crime scenes in the Netherlands, which were searched against the UK national DNA database. It is important to note two operational implications of searching these data. First, it cannot be assumed that the DNA from the Dutch crime scenes opens up a significant line of inquiry and identifies offenders, as there may be an innocent reason for some DNA, for example on a discarded cigarette end, being found at the scene. As with CPS policy here, we understand that the Dutch authorities will not take executive action on the basis of a DNA result alone and need to consider carefully the significance of a DNA match in each case. Secondly, many of the crime scene DNA profiles contained incomplete or partial information. These profiles have required additional scientific analysis by the UK and Dutch authorities to confirm whether or not there was indeed a match between a person sampled in the UK and a DNA profile from the Netherlands.
	Once the Dutch disk was passed to the National Policing Improvement Agency in January 2008 action was taken quickly to address public concerns. The custodian of the national DNA database immediately began batching and comparing the Dutch crime scene profiles against the UK DNA database, with details of the complete DNA matches passed to the Dutch in March 2008. The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) set up a gold group chaired by Gary Pugh, chair of the National DNA Database Strategy Board. This group comprised police and prosecuting interests and the Home Office and was set up to steer and direct operations, deal with any requests for further co-operation from the Dutch and to deal with any public protection issues triggered by intelligence about links with unsolved crimes in the Netherlands. The key objective was to identify individuals on the UK DNA database whose DNA matched samples recovered from crimes scenes in the Netherlands so that any dangerous offenders would be identified and the risks posed by them effectively managed. The individuals have been located and a detailed risk assessment carried out. Mr. Pugh has reported that the work of the group has now been completed and that the gold group is being stood down.
	Of the 2,159 DNA profiles received from crimes scenes in the Netherlands, 22 full matches were established against individuals on the UK DNA database. Ten of the individuals identified have committed offences in the UK since January 2007 and represent a total of 13 convictions. The individuals were convicted of a range of offences, the most serious being one case of aggravated burglary. Cases are pending against four individuals in respect of six other alleged offences with the most serious being attempted robbery.
	The UK authorities have been in close liaison with the Dutch authorities since February this year, providing information to progress inquiries in the Netherlands. All relevant additional DNA work and inquiries in the UK have been completed. We have not yet received any requests for action under a European arrest warrant but stand ready to assist as quickly as possible.
	This exercise has shown the value of this sort of information exchange in taking forward criminal investigations across borders. I am grateful for the joint working undertaken by the police and prosecuting authorities both here and in the Netherlands. For the future, the UK has agreed the European Council decision on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (known as the Prüm Council decision) which will provide a mechanism for member states' law enforcement authorities to search quickly across the EU for matches against DNA and fingerprint data, where a successful "hit" could be followed with a request for detailed information. It will also provide such authorities with direct access to vehicle registration data. All member states must implement this measure within the next three years. It should enable a much quicker and more efficient sharing of data in order to prevent, detect and investigate serious and terrorist-related crime while maintaining appropriate data protection safeguards.

Geoff Hoon: I would like to inform the House that the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has today published its final report on the rail accident that occurred near Grayrigg in Cumbria on 23 February 2007. A copy of the report is available in the House Libraries. Copies of the report are also available on the RAIB website at: www.raib.gov.uk.
	In summary, the report concludes that the immediate cause of the derailment was the deterioration of Lambrigg 2B points through a combination of failures of the three stretcher bars, the lock stretcher bar, and their fastenings. The unsafe condition arose as a result of a combination of three factors, which were the mechanical failure of a bolted joint, the incorrect set up of the points and a track inspection that was missed on 18 February 2007. It makes a number of important recommendations to the rail industry aimed at ensuring that the lessons are learned from this accident.
	I know that hon. and right hon. Members, and the travelling public, will want to be assured that the rail network is safe. The RAIB have already issued urgent safety advice to the rail industry—in June and November 2007—as their investigation progressed. The independent rail safety regulator, the Office of Rail Regulation, has assured me that no further immediate actions to ensure the safety of passengers and staff using Network Rail's infrastructure are necessary as a result of the report, beyond those that have already been taken.
	All RAIB investigations include a review of previous similar occurrences and the action taken in response to any related recommendations. In this context the RAIB reviewed the investigation into the accident at Potters Bar on May 2002.
	I will consider the detail of the report carefully and take a decision on the most appropriate way forward, both with regard to the accident at Grayrigg and the derailment at Potters Bar, the inquest for which was adjourned in February 2007 pending the outcome of the investigations into Grayrigg. I will also write to the affected parties shortly to seek their views and anticipate announcing my decision to the House early in the new year.
	I appreciate that this will mean a short further delay for the relatives of the bereaved, and I regret this. However, I consider it essential to ensure that the way forward is one that will deliver closure to those who were affected, as soon as possible. I am sure that the House will agree that it is important that full consideration is given to the RAIB report, and that the right decisions are made on how to proceed.